Source Analysis: Revisions and Alternatives

Source Analysis: Revisions and Alternatives

Theories of pentateuchal sources continue to be revised and refined and refuted in modern scholarship, and the process goes on.The approaches summarized here are only some of the more noteworthy, but certainly not the only, proposals.

Supplement Hypothesis

The supplement hypothesis accepts the notion of written source documents. In its reconstruction of the composition process it claims one of the documents was the backbone of the Pentateuch and others were added to fill out the story. The Priestly document is usually identified as the backbone.

Fragment Hypothesis

The fragment hypothesis was inspired by the difficulties scholars had in firmly identifying documents that served as sources. It denies that they actually existed as identifiable written works. Instead, this hypothesis argues that the Pentateuch was composed of a great variety of originally independent oral and written traditions, none of which was a dominant source.

Tradition History

A major reconstruction of the Pentateuch was developed by Noth (1948). He revised and supplemented the documentary hypothesis with a study of tradition history. Tradition history starts with the oral traditions that lie behind small textual units and traces how these units were combined into more comprehensive tradition blocks.

   Noth identified a small number of core Israelite beliefs about God's direction of Israelite history. The earliest beliefs were guidance out of Egypt and guidance into the promised land. To these were later added the themes of God's promises to the ancestors, guidance through the wilderness, and divine revelation at Sinai. These core beliefs attracted illustrative stories and clusters of episodes, or tradition blocks, accumulated around those beliefs. After these tradition blocks combined, they became the foundational narrative about Israel's past. From this narrative the Yahwist, Elohist, and Priestly written sources derived. 

   Noth saw the evolution of the written sources as a dynamic process of reworking and expansion as the tradition developed in conversation with the ongoing history of the Israelite people. He identified the Priestly source as the backbone of the Pentateuch to which the Yahwist and Elohist sources were added.

Priestly Editing, No Priestly Source

Cross (1973) argues that a combination of Yahwist and Elohist sources is the core of the Pentateuch. He argues that a Priestly source never existed independently. Rather, Priestly writing consisted of editing the other two sources and adding comments and other material as needed.

Late Date for the Yahwist Source

Schmid (1976) argues that the Yahwist source, usually dated to the reign of Solomon in the tenth century B.C.E., should instead be dated to the time of the exile in the sixth century B.C.E. He claims the Yahwist source must have come later because preexilic classical prophecy (eighth and seventh centuries B.C.E.) makes virtually no reference to the stories contained in the Yahwist source. 

   Van Seters (1975) examines the Abraham stories in Genesis and concludes that they reflect names, customs, and institutions of the exilic period of Israel's history, and not the time of a supposed Yahwist in Solomon's kingdom. Consequently, he argues that it arose in the exilic period.

Tradition Complexes

Rendtorff (1990) rejects the tradition historical reconstruction of Noth by arguing that there was no early foundational narrative. He concludes that the glue holding together pentateuchal themes is very late, coming from the Deuteronomic school. He argues against the whole enterprise of source analysis and claims that there were no Yahwist or Elohist sources, only late tradition complexes.

Literary Process

Whybray (1987) accepts the existence of pre-existing traditional material, yet argues that the process of composition was a literary process. Supported by insights from literary critics such as Alter (1981), Whybray suggests that repetition, the use of different divine names, and inconsistencies in the text were deliberate literary devices used to create texture. He claims such phenomena should not be used to reconstruct underlying documents.

Yahwist Narrative

Story Line. The Yahwist narrative begins at Genesis 2:4 and continues through the book of Numbers. When the individual episodes are gleaned out of Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers, and viewed together in isolation, the Yahwist epic tells a story of marvelous scope and deep human interest. The Yahwist epic extends from the creation of humankind, through the age of the ancestors, to the deliverance from Egypt and the journey through the Sinai wilderness. Some scholars even argue that the Yahwist source continues into the books of Joshua and Judges, incorporating accounts of the conquest and settlement. 

   The overall plot of the Torah was shaped by the historical sequence of events in the Yahwist source. By the stories it contains, it established the seven major event complexes that constitute the structure of pre-Israelite history.

• 1. Stories of human origins

  2. A covenant with the patriarchs

  3. Persecution in Egypt

  4. Exit from Egypt

  5. Wandering in the Sinai wilderness

  6. A covenant made at Mount Sinai

  7. Temporary encampment in Transjordan

   The later sources added additional stories to these topics but did not essentially change this direction of development or the itinerary.

Style. The Yahwist was a gifted storyteller who was especially interested in the human side of things. The following are some of the stylistic features of the Yahwist. 

   Yahweh is often represented with humanlike qualities. He is alternately a potter, a gardener, a "man" -- the literary technique of anthropomorphism. Yahweh walks with Adam and Eve, seals the door of the ark, has a meal with Abraham, bargains with Abraham over Sodom and Gomorrah, and actually changes his mind about destroying Israel because of the golden calves. Yahweh appears directly to people and expects a childlike faith and obedience. 

   Yahweh is intent on working out events so that the objects of his attention will be blessed. Yet he is a God who is absolutely opposed to sin. After it happens, he confronts the offenders and does not let a challenge to his authority go unpunished, as in the Garden of Eden and the Tower of Babel stories. 

   The Yahwist has his own characteristic vocabulary. Some examples:

• • "to bless" is the characteristic way Yahweh deals kindly with others

  • "to know" is a euphemism for sexual intercourse

  • "to find favor" for pleasing someone

  • Canaanites for the inhabitants of Palestine, whereas the Elohist uses Amorites

  • Reuel or Hobab for Moses's father-in-law, whereas the Elohist uses Jethro

  • Sinai for the residence of Yahweh, whereas the Elohist calls it Horeb

  • Israel rather than the name Jacob for the third patriarch

   The Yahwist is also very fond of word play, often using it to make a theological point, or provide a suggestion of the origin of someone or something -- called an etiology:

• • Eve, the mother of all living, from hawwah, "life" (Genesis 3:20)

  • Babel, the place where language was confused, from balal, "to confuse" (Genesis 11:9)

  • Edom, an alternate name for Esau, from edom, "red," the color of Esau's complexion, the color of the stew he ate in lieu of his birthright, and the color of the mountains of the territory called Edom

  • Israel, "one who strives with God," the name for Jacob after he wrestled with God at the Jabbok (Genesis 32:27)

   The Yahwist is refreshingly honest when he deals with the character flaws, even sometimes blatant sins, of the main characters. He is not interested in white-washing them, or making them squeaky clean "heroes of the faith." He exposes:

• • the lie of Abraham when he tells Pharaoh that Sarah is his sister (Genesis 12:10-20)

  • the underhanded deceit of Jacob in tricking Esau and Laban (Genesis 27; 30-31)

  • the dastardly trick of Simeon and Levi in killing the Shechemites (Genesis 34)

   The Yahwist writer tends to express his theology through speeches of Yahweh placed at decisive transition points in the epic. The following divine speeches occur in Genesis:

• • the prohibition of eating from the tree, "lest you die" (Genesis 2:16-17)

  • the curses on the serpent, woman and man (Genesis 3:14-19)

  • to Cain, "if you do well you will be acceptable" (Genesis 4:6-7,11ff.)

  • before the flood, "I am sorry that I have made them" (Genesis 6:3, 5-8)

  • after the flood, "I will never again curse the ground" (Genesis 8:21-22)

  • Tower of Babel, "this is only the beginning of what they will do (11:6-7)

  • to Abraham after Lot separated (Genesis 13:14-17)

  • about Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:17-19)

   Such theologizing in speech typifies the Yahwist's literary-theological perspective that God was immediately present to these people, and spoke with them directly.

Theology. The core of the Yahwist epic is the divine promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3. The groundwork justifying the need for divine help and promise was laid in the stories of the growth of sin in the primeval era. Humankind tried to become great on its own, to be like God. But it resulted in utter failure. 

   Greatness would come only through Yahweh's initiative. Yahweh took that initiative with Abraham. Israel's history is interpreted as illustration and fulfillment of the promises made to him. "I will make your name great" (12:2) becomes the prefiguring of the great name of David and Israel (2 Samuel 7:9-16). 

   The unconditional promise made to Abraham, from the perspective of the Yahwist at the Davidic court, echoes the promise Yahweh made to David. The promises were made without demands, as a gift from the divine king to his favored "son." Even when the recipient demonstrates himself unworthy, the promise is not withdrawn. 

   The promise, however, was not intended to be a merit badge worn with self-satisfaction. It was unearned. But it was to be worn as a reminder of responsibility. Abraham, and hence David and all Israel, were chosen to be an instrument of blessing: "Through you all families of the earth shall bless themselves/be blessed." This universal intent was certainly reinforced and justified when the Yahwist prefaced the national story with the "all-world" Primeval Story, Genesis 2.11 

   The optimism of the royal court is certainly communicated in this vision of national destiny. Yahweh was working out his universal plan through Israel. The Yahwist never flagged in his zeal for this mission: to extend the blessings of Yahweh to the other nations. Only later, when the shortcomings of the Davidic dynasty became evident and competing theologies demanded a hearing, was there a challenge to this vision. The first to offer a counterview was the Elohist writer.

Elohist Texts

Story Line. The Elohist source is the most difficult source to handle. It is certainly more fragmentary than the Yahwist source, probably because where it duplicated the Yahwist source its version was dropped. It was perhaps designed to be a corrective supplement to the Yahwist source. In any case, there is more controversy about the Elohist than about any other source in the Pentateuch. Some scholars dispute that it ever existed. They suggest that the Elohist was not a continuous source but only the residue of some editing done by a group of priests from northern Israel who supplemented the Yahwist. Westermann (1976) claims that the so-called Elohist material does not come from a common source but is a pot pourri from a variety of different places. 

   Nonetheless, there may be enough evidence to suggest that an Elohist source once did exist. For instance, doublets of certain basic story plots are found, and the duplicates evidence the characteristic vocabulary of the sources. The patriarch who tells a prominent foreigner that his wife is his sister so that he would not be killed for her is found in both Yahwist (Genesis 12:10-20 and 26:7-11) and Elohist (Genesis 20:1-18) versions. Also, certain narratives contain a combination of both Yahwist and Elohist material, suggesting that both traditions had the same story and were later combined. Examples of this are Jacob's dream (Genesis 28:10-22), Moses's calling (Exodus 3), and the theophany at Sinai (Exodus 19). 

   The Yahwist uses the divine name Yahweh from the very beginning. In contrast, the Elohist is more historically accurate. In his account (as also in the Priestly account), the name Yahweh was first revealed to Moses just before the exodus. So in his stories before the time of Moses he uses the divine name Elohim, the more generic Hebrew way of referring to God. 

   Beginning with Exodus 3, however, it is especially difficult to tell the difference between Yahwist material and Elohist material. Beginning at that point both use the divine name Yahweh. Usually, though, we can still identify them by their characteristic vocabularies, styles, and themes.

Style. The distinguishing vocabulary of the Elohist writer includes using Jethro to refer to Moses' father-in-law (Reuel or Hobab in the Yahwist). Instead of Sinai as the place of covenant making (as in the Yahwist and in the Priestly source), the Elohist calls it the mountain of Elohim or Horeb. 

   The Elohist is fond of using repetitions when God is calling someone, for example, "Abraham, Abraham" (Genesis 22) and "Moses, Moses" (Exodus 3). And the preferred response is "I'm here". 

   The Elohist source does not have any preancestral stories: no stories of creation or the universal origins of humankind. Perhaps this indicates that the Elohist was more narrowly focused on Israel as the people of God. The Yahwist, in contrast, had a universal interest. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations. According to the Elohist, Israel was called to be God's people, exclusively devoted to him. 

   The Elohist is hesitant to criticize the ancestors and leaders (except Aaron). The story of Abraham and Sarah (Genesis 20) is instructive in this regard. The Elohist implies that Abraham is at least technically correct, if not entirely candid, when he says to Abimelech that Sarah is his sister. When the Yahwist tells basically the same story in Genesis 12 he does not leave Abraham any room for doubt like the Elohist, but instead implies his guilt. 

   Coming to faith and living the life of faith were not easy in the view of the Elohist. God initiated trials and tests to hone the faith of God's people. Abraham was tried, Israel was tested. But God always provided, in the end. The Elohist had a special interest in the faith and obedience of the covenant people. He was concerned that the people be obedient first of all to God. That obedience is crystalized in the phrase "the fear of God" in the Elohist stories. Virtually every story has a moral about fearing God. No doubt it recommends the attitude of fearing God because of the propensity, especially of people in the north, to offend the God of Israel by worshiping Baal of the Canaanites.

Theology. The Elohist emphasized the transcendent nature of God. There are no direct encounters between God and the people, as in the Yahwist account. When God does come to people, he typically does so in dreams, visions, or by messengers, and always from a distance. When God appears, it is in the form of a cloud or a flame. And even when he appears personally to Moses (Exodus 33), Moses sees only God's back. Consistent with this fear of the presence of God, it is the Elohist who tells us that no one can look at God and live (Exodus 33:20). 

   Another distinctive feature of the Elohist is his concern with prophecy and hearing God. The premonarchic heroes of the faith, Abraham, Joseph, and Moses, are portrayed as prophets. They show tremendous respect for God and "fear" him. When they approach God, they do so by using the appropriate ritual forms. The Elohist's interest in prophets and prophecy suggests that he might have had significant contact with the prophetic circles in Israel, probably the circles associated with Elijah and Elisha, who were prophets in northern Israel in the ninth century B.C.E. 

   The Elohist highlights Moses as the spiritual leader of the people. Moses had an indispensible role in mediating the covenant. The Elohist does not talk at all about a covenant with Abraham as the basis of God's future relationship with the Israelites. Rather, the Mosaic covenant established at Horeb (the Elohist way of referring to Mount Sinai) is the basis of the people's bond with God. 

   The Elohist pays particular attention to Israel's special covenantal relationship with God. He stresses that the covenant community God formed with Israel at Horeb in Moses' day is more fundamental than the ruling arrangement with the Davidic dynasty in Judah, or the newly shaped dynasties in the Northern Kingdom. The Elohist was not awed by powerful governmental structures, as was the Yahwist of the Davidic court. He was more critical of the establishment and the powers that be. 

   The Elohist points out God's special interest in Israel. He tells how God acted decisively to preserve his people at critical junctures in their history. In the Elohist portion of the Joseph story, Joseph remarked to his brothers that what they had done to him was part of God's plan to preserve a remnant during the devasting famine (Genesis 45:5-7). The story of the faithful midwives Shiphrah and Puah "who feared God" (Exodus 1:15-21) tells how they helped to preserve the family of Jacob during hard times in Egypt. 

   In summary, the Elohist suggests that Israel must fear God and be obedient. That obedience must be shaped by the covenant. God is present to his people, but at a distance and in a veiled way, because he is so terrifying.